Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:02 AM
 
26,855 posts, read 15,085,917 times
Reputation: 11883

Advertisements

Remember Obama's "sit in the back seat" comment?

Last edited by bluesjuke; 02-14-2016 at 11:12 AM..
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,121 posts, read 19,344,613 times
Reputation: 5273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
Obama has appointed two radical liberals to the court already, including a Hispanic racist who passionately supports illegal immigration and a radical liberal/feminist who tried to ban military recruiters from Harvard. The President and the Senate are supposed to come together to appoint a nominee. So you're saying if Obama keeps on appointing radical far left nutjobs, the Senate is obligated to allow it? Or maybe Obama needs to be more moderate in his choices.
Obama should nominate who he feels is best or the job and the Senate should consider it, hold hearings and have a vote. If that candidate has majority support in the Senate, they should be apponted, if not we go back to the drawing board and either Obama nominates someone else or this is taken into Eection Day. However, to refuse any action, any vote, etc on the nominee that would be wrong.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:05 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,284 posts, read 54,079,395 times
Reputation: 40572
Quote:
Originally Posted by boneyard1962 View Post
Do we want another Sonia Sotomayor? Some might, but many don't. I agree with you tho, this topic shouldn't be what makes someone vote. You can protest the choices with a write in vote, or vote for an independent. Ross Perot cost Bush I an election.

I don't know about you but I'd like someone who both believes in and interprets the Constitution impartially. That the GOP obstructionists have chosen to declare their opposition before a name is even in place tells me they do neither.

Screw 'em, I hope they get their sanctimonious butts handed to 'em in the next election, people who judge a book without even a glance at a cover deserve nothing more.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Here and There
2,538 posts, read 3,863,931 times
Reputation: 3790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
I suspect the low end Democrats who rely on the Govt will be clueless about this issue.

It will bring out more of the conservative vote and probably sweep an R into the White House.
Thank goodness the poorest states in the nation that require the most money FROM the government aren't mainly Republican states. Right, Rakin?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-mos...vernment/2700/
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:09 AM
 
Location: The Heart of Dixie
10,121 posts, read 15,802,129 times
Reputation: 7099
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
No, I'm saying anyone who believes the GOP's intention is to approve anyone but a radical conservative nomination should come see me about a lovely little bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn.

They've
declared the game to be obstructionism, they'll pick what they've planted.
THat's completely false. We want a reasonable Supreme Court justice, not another far left judge who will legislate from the bench. You have no problem with Sotomayor who supported allowing firefighters who failed the test to get the job over qualified white firefighters simply for affirmative action purposes? She also said that her Hispanic race should be a factor in why she should be chosen!

Or Elena Kagan who is clearly biased in favor of the gay movement and who was so radical as to ban the military from the Harvard campus? If Obama appointed a moderate like John Roberts, PERHAPS you might have a point, though Roberts himself is a liberal who supported Obamacare twice and also supported gay marriage. So much is at stake here, including the jobs that will be lost if the EPA is not reigned in (one of Scalia's last cases was where the Court struck down an EPA mandate that would have destroyed tens of thousands of jobs here in Appalachia) , our gun rights, and the lives of millions of unborn children that Planned Parenthood will potentially end if they are not kept in check.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:10 AM
 
18,986 posts, read 9,005,545 times
Reputation: 14688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Obama should nominate who he feels is best or the job and the Senate should consider it, hold hearings and have a vote. If that candidate has majority support in the Senate, they should be apponted, if not we go back to the drawing board and either Obama nominates someone else or this is taken into Eection Day. However, to refuse any action, any vote, etc on the nominee that would be wrong.
Not only would it be wrong, it would be unconstitutional. The Constitution specifically gives the President the power and the duty to nominate a candidate, and lays out the Senate's duty to act on said candidate. No where in the Constitution does it say, "unless it would be politically expedient for the majority party in the Senate not to act."

It's funny how Conservatives quote the Constitution...until it doesn't suit their political purposes. Then, what the Constitution says doesn't really matter so much any more.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:15 AM
 
Location: 57
1,427 posts, read 1,178,250 times
Reputation: 1262
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMSS View Post
What are these "freebies"?
Oil depletion allowances, dirt-cheap grazing rights on millions of federal acres, mining claim rights on almost anybody's land who's in your way,highways built whose costs aren't close to be being covered by low fuel taxes, patent laws protecting aspirin-repackagers, television and radio frequencies for free to monopolies that sell advertising, and taxpayer funded bailouts to key banks when it all gets to be too much for "free marketers." Oh, and food stamps to move cheap subsidized food commodities in the supermarkets and federally supported crop prices and mandates to use corn based alcohol for fuel. Also, thousands of private airports maintained for only private planes (do you have one?) adding billions of dollars to every ticket sold on common carrier airlines that use only 146 airports in the US. Let me see, what else am I forgetting? About 67 bucks a week to an unwed, uneducated mother who couldn't find an abortion at the right time so that she and her kids can half-starve and grow up to do it all over again. THAT'S what's breaking us.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:17 AM
 
26,855 posts, read 15,085,917 times
Reputation: 11883
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMSS View Post
Do second ammendment cases even make it to Supreme Court? Anyway, I have no need for another man who is still fighting homosexuality, interracial relationships, and demanding religion be in our schools.




Yes.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:17 AM
 
Location: Here and There
2,538 posts, read 3,863,931 times
Reputation: 3790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
THat's completely false. We want a reasonable Supreme Court justice, not another far left judge who will legislate from the bench. You have no problem with Sotomayor who supported allowing firefighters who failed the test to get the job over qualified white firefighters simply for affirmative action purposes? She also said that her Hispanic race should be a factor in why she should be chosen!

Or Elena Kagan who is clearly biased in favor of the gay movement and who was so radical as to ban the military from the Harvard campus? If Obama appointed a moderate like John Roberts, PERHAPS you might have a point, though Roberts himself is a liberal who supported Obamacare twice and also supported gay marriage. So much is at stake here, including the jobs that will be lost if the EPA is not reigned in (one of Scalia's last cases was where the Court struck down an EPA mandate that would have destroyed tens of thousands of jobs here in Appalachia) , our gun rights, and the lives of millions of unborn children that Planned Parenthood will potentially end if they are not kept in check.
Man alive, we are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum. Wow. EPA mandates are a good thing, maybe it's time to quit using the backs of uneducated people from Appalachia to make a dime, eh? Gun rights? How about some more gun laws, please?! Like outlawing automatics for starters. Planned Parenthood (when properly funded) PREVENTS unwanted pregnancies, hence LESS abortions. How about you stay the f$&k away from my vagina already? And ACA is lame (thanks to the watering down from Repubs, insurance companies, big pharma) but it's a start of hopefully UNIVERSAL healthcare, because healthcare is a RIGHT.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2016, 11:22 AM
 
26,855 posts, read 15,085,917 times
Reputation: 11883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albert_The_Crocodile View Post
Yes... if only liberals had more lunatic call-in radio hosts to tell them how to think....




Lefties did not possess the brain power to make their talk shows a success.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top